No money for Jerry Brown’s high-speed choo-choo?

March 19, 2017

Via Legal Insurrection:

A few, short weeks ago, I reported that President Trump’s Secretary of Transportation halted the transfer of millions of dollars in funding for the California bullet train, our governor’s legacy project.

However, those monies were not the sole source of funding. The main source of ongoing support for the train is the income from the cap-and-trade auctions that California sponsors.

It appears as if the all the air (carbon dioxide included) has gone out of the cap-and-trade market.

Let’s pause for a moment to contemplate that last sentence. What meaning can we draw from it? 

A boondoggle was being funded by a fraud.

I’ll let you read the rest of Leslie Eastman’s post if you wish, but here’s the summary: the governor and our leftist legislature tried to find alternate sources of funding for the high-speed rail project by granting it a share of revenues expected from our cap-and-trade auctions, established under Governor Schwarzenegger in a stupid quest to fight a problem that does not exist, catastrophic man-caused global warming.

But I digress.

The original funding has been tied up in lawsuits, and the Trump administration has already made it clear it’s not going to waste public money on this project. Thus the measure to divert cap-and-trade revenues. Only, for various reasons, no one is interested in buying the modern equivalent of Confederate war bonds. The auctions raise almost no revenue, threatening the viability of the high-speed railroad.

I call this a good thing.

I’ve inveighed against this stupid project before, so I’ll spare you another rant. California has many, many needs: our finances are a mess, our roads and highways are lousy, our schools are mediocre, and our dams are crumbling.

But Jerry Brown wants his legacy: a high-speed choo-choo that won’t meet the projected speeds and ridership, and is running way past projected costs.

As Victor Davis Hanson wrote:

Governors who cannot build a reservoir have little business fantasizing about 200-mph super trains.

Let’s hope the failure of the cap-and-trade auctions is the pinprick that finally bursts the Governor’s fantasy bubble.

h/t SteveinTN

PS: Speaking of aging infrastructure, we have another crumbling reservoir.


Bank of England: “Climate change a ‘huge’ financial risk”

September 30, 2015

The only “financial risk” is being bilked into bankruptcy by the Green Cult and its cronies.

Watts Up With That?

climate-cash

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

The Bank of England has stepped into the climate fray, with a claim that climate change poses a huge financial risk to UK based businesses. For once I believe the Bank of England is absolutely correct (more below).

According to the Sydney Morning Herald;

Bank of England Governor Mark Carney said Britain’s insurers face potentially “huge” exposure to shifts in climate-change policy and Group of 20 nations need to do more to combat associated financial-stability risks.

“The challenges currently posed by climate change pale in significance compared with what might come,” Mr Carney said in a speech at a Lloyd’s of London dinner.

“Once climate change becomes a defining issue for financial stability, it may already be too late.”
England’s central bank has been looking into the economic and financial-stability risks posed by climate change and Carney spoke as the BoE published a report on…

View original post 444 more words


Touchy Feely Science – one chart suggests there’s a ‘pHraud’ in omitting Ocean Acidification data in Congressional testimony

December 23, 2014

If true, this could be the “Climategate” moment for ocean acidification. The level of “noble cause corruption” in the climate alarmist camp is scary.

Watts Up With That?

“…startling data omission that he told me: “eclipses even the so-called climategate event.””

Willis Eschenbach tips me to a story by Marita Noon, titled:

What if Obama’s climate change policies are based on pHraud?

I’ve reproduced portions of it here, with a link to the full article. The graph with ALL the data is compelling.


“Ocean acidification” (OA) is receiving growing attention. While someone who doesn’t follow climate change science might think OA is a stomach condition resulting from eating bad seafood, OA is claimed to be a phenomenon that will destroy ocean life—all due to mankind’s use of fossil fuels. It is a foundational theory upon which the global warming/climate change narrative is built.

The science and engineering website Quest, recently posted: “Since the Industrial Revolution in the late 1700s, we have been mining and burning coal, oil and natural gas for energy and transportation. These processes release…

View original post 1,003 more words


1971 – World’s Top Climate Scientists Said Fossil Fuels Would Cause An Ice Age By 2020

June 9, 2014

Amusing. In 1971, “top climate scientists” were screaming about a coming ice age and that CO2 was nothing to worry about, then, suddenly they were all about the warming. And the name James Hanson appears in both camps… What a coincidence.

Real Science

In 1971, the world’s top climate scientists Schneider, Hansen and Rasool predicted that burning fossil fuels would trigger an ice age. They also determined that CO2 was nothing to worry about.

ScreenHunter_380 Jun. 08 22.26ScreenHunter_388 Jun. 08 22.30

ScreenHunter_389 Jun. 08 22.31U.S. Scientist Sees New Ice Age Coming

A few years later they realized that there was much more research money available for global warming, so they changed their scientific judgment to say the exact opposite of what they said in 1971.

View original post


The most ridiculous predictions made on Earth Day, 1970

April 25, 2014
AlGore

The end is nigh!

With modern-day eco-doom cultists predicting catastrophe almost daily unless we DO SOMETHING NOW!!!, my friend Jon Gabriel decided to take a look back at 13 apocalyptic predictions made for the first Earth Day, way back in the Nixon administration. Here are a couple of goodies:

“[One] theory assumes that the earth’s cloud cover will continue to thicken as more dust, fumes, and water vapor are belched into the atmosphere by industrial smokestacks and jet planes. Screened from the sun’s heat, the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born.” — Newsweek magazine

“The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” — Kenneth Watt

Funny, I don’t recall any glaciers showing up in Los Angeles in the last few years…

Read the rest for 11 more amazing predictions of doom and bookmark it for reference for when someone tries to sell you on global warming.


But… But… But I thought wind power would save the planet!

February 17, 2011

Apparently they don’t do well in harsh winters, which isn’t good for their customers:

A $200-million wind farm in northern New Brunswick is frozen solid, cutting off a supply of renewable energy for NB Power.

The 25-kilometre stretch of wind turbines, 70 kilometres northwest of Bathurst, has been shut down for several weeks due to heavy ice covering the blades. GDF Suez Energy, the company that owns and operates the site, is working to return the windmills to working order, a spokeswoman says.

“We can’t control the weather,” Julie Vitek said from company headquarters in Houston.

No, really?

Let’s see. Wind power has been sold to us by the Green Statists as one of the perfect solutions for a problem that does not exist, anthropogenic global warming. Trouble is, wind turbines are no good when the wind is too slow or too fast. They still require old-fashioned electrical power stations to be online constantly as backups. They are sound neither from an economic nor an engineering standpoint. The need lavish subsidies to turn a profit at all.

And now they can’t keep the heat running when you need it most.

Genius.

via Fausta

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


How GM did not pay back its loan

May 1, 2010

At Reason.TV, Nick Gillespie explains just how big a lie GM Chairman Ed Whitacre has been telling in those recent commercials in which he brags of paying off the company’s government loans early and in full:

Yes, GM and the Obama administration really do think we’re that stupid.


Another day, another global warming claim goes *poof!*

February 16, 2010

First it was the temperature data and the Dread Hockey Stick of Doom that turned out to be near-total fabrications. Then it was the glaciers that weren’t really melting as fast as claimed, and the rain forests that weren’t receding as much as claimed. And now it’s the increase in the frequency and power of hurricanes that isn’t happening:

Dr. Les Hatton, a fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, today released a global statistical analysis testing six Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) statements against raw data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric (NOAA) Administration to prove there has been no increase in global hurricanes or typhoons, contrary to IPCC claims.

Hatton was inspired to analyse the IPPC hurricane data after the climategate email revelations and found that although the North Atlantic hurricane activity increased significantly, the increase was cancelled out overall by diminished activity in the East Pacific. Thus, the declines balance the increases. His detailed report can be found in this PDF.

  • “When you average the number of storms and their strength, it almost exactly balances.”

I begin to wonder if there’s anything true at all in anything the IPCC has published. The organization’s credibility has been ruined, a self-inflicted death. Time for it to be disestablished.

Oh, and time for Al Gore to surrender his Nobel Peace Prize and his Academy Award.

LINKS: More at Hot Air and Fausta.


How do you say “Hide the decline” in Swedish?

February 15, 2010

Looks like we have another case of playing fast and loose with the data, this time in Scandinavia:

Climate skeptic blogger Frank Lansner at Hide the Decline (EU) has done an excellent job in bringing to our attention the analysis of Swedish scientist and skeptic, Dr. Wibjorn Karlen from Stockholm University, who has studied the Scandinavian temperature records between 1900 and 2000.

Dr. Karlén has debunked the fraud of the IPCC for falsifying the temperature of the Scandinavian region at the end of the 20th century to make them appear a staggerring 0.7 Degree Centigrade higher than actually existed.

In fact, the peak in temperatures for this cold northern European territory occurred not in recent years, but between 1930-50. After compiling data from all the available data sources in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden Karlén found that:

  • “The very significant temperature peak around 1930-40 has been reduced almost removed totally.”

Read the whole thing. This fraud is crumbling faster than a wet cookie.

RELATED: If the Earth is warming as the cultists claim, why is the Northern Hemisphere’s snow line moving south?

UPDATE: Roger Kimball can’t resist saying “I told you so.”


From the bunker: Hitler learns climate change is a fraud

February 15, 2010

Hot on the heels of Phil Jones’ devastating interview, Hitler learns that the global-warming scam is falling apart:

Rolling on the floor

(via Fausta, who has lots of neat links)


More climate-change fraud revealed

February 2, 2010

The hits keep coming. At this rate, it’s becoming safer to assume that the opposite of whatever the IPCC says is true. First, from China:

Climategate intensifies: Jones and Wang apparently hid Chinese station data issues

The “climategate” controversy intensified last night when the senior British scientist at its centre, Professor Phil Jones, faced fresh accusations that he attempted to withhold data that could cast doubt on evidence for rising world temperatures.
But the new allegations go beyond refusing FOI requests and concern data that Professor Jones and other scientists have used to support a record of recent world temperatures that shows an upward trend.
Climate sceptics have suggested that some of the higher readings may be due not to a warmer atmosphere, but to the so-called “urban heat island effect”, where cities become reservoirs of heat and are warmer than the surrounding countryside, especially during the night hours.
Phil Jones is the “scientist” who, until the recent leaking of the damning emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, was one of the Chief Priests of the Cult of Anthropogenic Global Warming.  Now the allegations of fraud extend back at least 20 years and involves hiding evidence of a) how urban areas skew temperature readings and b) the terrible track that’s been kept of these stations, some of which don’t even exist anymore.
And we’re to take this man seriously why?
Meanwhile, following up on a story I covered a few months ago, a major New Zealand research unit has been forced to admit it cannot explain how it came up with the temperature data it has, because it destroyed the raw data:
With great embarrassment the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) in New Zealand has been forced to release it’s raw temperature data, but they have no record of why and when any adjustments were made to this data. Yet again, it appears climate scientists are re-writing the temperature history of the world.
In other words, the adjusted results are crap because no one can test the raw data to verify them. We just have to take them on faith.
How fitting for a cult.
Oh, and the Man Behind the Kiwi Curtain is Jim Salinger, who has collaborated with noted AGW alarmist (and ClimateGate principal) Michael Mann of Penn State… who also happens to be under investigation.
Is this science or a remake of Ocean’s 11?

Is there anything the IPCC hasn’t lied about?

January 27, 2010

Ye gods. The whole edifice of their “settled science” is crumbling like a wet cookie. From James Delingpole:

After Climategate, Pachaurigate and Glaciergate: Amazongate

AGW theory is toast. So’s Dr Rajendra Pachauri. So’s the Stern Review. So’s the credibility of the IPCC. But if you think I’m cheered by this you’re very much mistaken. I’m trying to write a Climategate book but the way things are going by the time I’m finished there won’t be anything left to say: the battle will already have been won and the only people left who still believe in Man Made Global Warming will be the eco-loon equivalents of those wartime Japanese soldiers left abandoned and forgotten on remote Pacific atolls.


Here’s the latest development, courtesy of Dr Richard North – and it’s a cracker. It seems that, not content with having lied to us about shrinking glaciers, increasing hurricanes, and rising sea levels, the IPCC’s latest assessment report also told us a complete load of porkies about the danger posed by climate change to the Amazon rainforest.

Hint: The geniuses of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claimed we were in danger of losing up to 40% of the Amazon rainforests to global warming. Trouble is, there’s no evidence to back their claims.

At this rate, only carbon-trading con artists and bawling emo-hippies will take this global-warming garbage seriously.


The glaciers are melting! The glaciers are melt… Eh, maybe not.

January 18, 2010

This is happening so often these days that it’s almost not news anymore: yet another dire prediction from the Cult of Anthropogenic Global Warming has been shown to be as false as an Obama campaign promise and will have to be withdrawn:

World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown

A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.

Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world’s glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.

In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC’s 2007 report.

It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.

Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was “speculation” and was not supported by any formal research. If confirmed it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research. The IPCC was set up precisely to ensure that world leaders had the best possible scientific advice on climate change.

Professor Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on glaciers in the IPCC report, said he would recommend that the claim about glaciers be dropped: “If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, than I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments.”

Apparently no one bothered to check the original story, which hadn’t been replicated or peer-reviewed, yet it was put into the IPCC report as an established fact. On top of that, the “scientist” in charge of the glaciers section of that report has admitted that he’s not an expert in the field. One would think the IPCC would put a glaciologist in charge of a report dealing with glaciers, but, no. It was left to genuine experts in glaciers to reveal just how ludicrous the IPCC’s claims about the Himalayan glaciers were.

Given the revelations about the infamous hockey-stick graphs and the Climategate scandal, add to them this latest humiliation, and one has to wonder how anyone anymore takes seriously anything the alarmist crowd asserts. The IPCC reports are supposed to represent the best science in order to guide policy makers when they grapple with the (nonexistent) problem of global warming. At this rate, they might as well just consult their local paper’s astrology column.

(via Christy on Twitter)

LINKS: More at Watt’s Up With That?, Sister Toldjah, Hot Air, and Fausta.

UPDATE: Ah, here comes the fine stench of corruption. The head of the IPCC, Dr. Rajenda Pachauri, defended the claims about the Himalayan glaciers while heading an institute that was seeking funding based on those same claims. Read the whole post to get an idea of how disinterested these guys are. (Hint: not very.)


Climategate the music video

November 24, 2009

You just knew it was coming:

Mockery, the best weapon.

(via Watt’s Up With That?)


Iowahawk Geographic: The Secret Life of Climate Researchers

November 24, 2009

I used to love Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom, and I’m glad to see Iowahawk continuing the tradition of documenting wildlife in its natural state. In this episode, he looks at The Secret Life of Climate Researchers:

Within minutes of arriving on campus, the migratory researchers approach the entrance of the Climate Research Unit and perform the secret credential dance, fiercely displaying their prominent curriculum vitae. This signals to the security drone that they can be trusted with the sacred electronic lanyard badge that will grant them entrance to the hive’s inner sanctum.

During the upcoming research season, this hive alone will produce over 6 million metric tons of grant-sustaining climate data guano, but until recently little was known about the elusive genus of homo scientifica living inside. Where do they come from? What strange force draws them here year after year? In order to unravel the mystery, Iowahawk Geographic documentary filmmaker David Burge undertook a painstaking one-week project to finally capture the climate researchers in their native habitat.

In this exclusive footage, Burge warily approaches the hive’s security drone, disguising himself as smelly graduate student. Burge has theorized that as a member of the lowest stratum in the hive’s social system, the drone likely enjoys partying. He reaches into his backpack and offers the drone a pint of Guinness and a small bag of weed in exchange for the hive’s internal security tapes and email files. Success.

The never-before seen security tapes obtained by Burge provide a rare glimpse into the inner working of the climate research hive and its amazing guano production. In this sequence, we see one group of researchers entering the hive each carrying a datum they have retrieved from a distant climate measuring station. This is the cause of much excitement among their colleagues, who buzz around in a grant-writing frenzy.

Read and enjoy the whole thing.  Rolling on the floor

RELATED READING: Background on the scandal some are calling (predictably) ClimateGate here and here.


Even the MSM cannot ignore it

November 22, 2009

You know a scandal may have legs when even the mainstream media, which has generally hewed to alarmist line regarding global warming, reports on the evidence of scientific fraud:

Electronic files that were stolen from a prominent climate research center and made public last week provide a rare glimpse into the behind-the-scenes battle to shape the public perception of global warming.

While few U.S. politicians bother to question whether humans are changing the world’s climate — nearly three years ago the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded the evidence was unequivocal — public debate persists. And the newly disclosed private exchanges among climate scientists at Britain’s Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia reveal an intellectual circle that appears to feel very much under attack, and eager to punish its enemies.

In one e-mail, the center’s director, Phil Jones, writes Pennsylvania State University’s Michael E. Mann and questions whether the work of academics that question the link between human activities and global warming deserve to make it into the prestigious IPCC report, which represents the global consensus view on climate science.

“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report,” Jones writes. “Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!

(Emphasis added)

The highlighted segment of the Post article reiterates the point I made yesterday: results had become more important to significant players in the “climate alarmist community” than truth, leading to a willingness to corrupt the scientific process by excluding contrary articles from scientific literature. Again, this revelation and the others contained in the leaked emails should call all pro-alarmist research into question. As the article points out, most politicians in the US have been unquestioning sheep about anthropogenic climate change. Maybe this time they’ll develop a healthy skepticism.

(hat tip: Hot Air)

Further reading: Fausta has several good links, while Power Line presents a case-study of how alarmists do science.


Global warming fraud exposed?

November 21, 2009

These are dark times indeed for true believers in the religion of Anthropogenic Global Warming: not only is the empirical evidence going more and more against their Inconvenient Truths, but now there have come revelations of scandal within the walls of one of the Holy Places of the Faith. A hacker broke into the computer systems of the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit and stole over 60 megabytes of emails and other documents and released them to the public.

The significance of of these files is that they strongly indicate deliberate fraud and the illegal destruction of data by researchers seeking to bolster the case for AGW. They also speak of plans (at least) to corrupt the peer-review process by smearing skeptical scientists in order to blackball them, thus creating a review process slanted favorably toward research that supports the anthropogenic thesis of global warming and ignores any problems with that research.

James Delingpole of The Telegraph has a good overview of the ethical roaches uncovered by this (let’s be blunt) theft. Let me quote from one of the emails dealing with the corruption of the peer-review process:

“This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?”

“I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.”“It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice !”

Talk like this should mortify anyone concerned for the integrity of science. The peer-review process is crucial to maintaining this integrity. For any scientist to try to game and shape this system in their favor should lead to calling into question the whole body of their research, especially when global-warming alarmists, such as the scientists at the CRU, are demanding governments take extreme measures to fix a problem the scientists claim is incontrovertible fact.

If half of what was revealed is true, then any credibility possessed by the pro-AGW faction in the scientific community, national governments, and the UN is crippled or outright destroyed. The Senate should call an immediate halt to any further consideration its version  of the Waxman-Markey bill, passage of which would be disastrous for the US economy, until the truth about these revelations from CRU can be determined.

Besides Delingpole’s article, here are a few other links you’ll want to read to get an idea of the scope of this scandal:

The mind boggles at the possible scope of the fraud revealed today. For the sheer magnitude of its potential effect on the world’s economy, it dwarfs other scandals, such as fake fetal stem cell research. If true, it could be fatal to the Anthropogenic Global Warming movement.

Let’s hope it’s true, then.

LINKS: Others writing on this include Michelle Malkin, Gabriel Malor, Ed Morrissey, Stacy McCain, Climate Skeptic, SBVOR (which calls this the “Watergate of Global Warming”), Sister Toldjah, Big Government, and Blue Crab Boulevard. At Power Line, attorney John Hinderaker looks at the emails and thinks they reflect not so much an active conspiracy as a bunker mentality among true believers.

(hat tip: Watt’s Up With That?)


The stimulus swindle

November 6, 2009

The picture kind of says it all, doesn’t it?

StimSwindleClick For a larger image.

(courtesy Congressman Thaddeus McCotter)